The Morning Report
Get the news and information you need to take on the day.
• John Pilch:
It appears that the city of San Diego wants to return to being a little cow town on the border rather than the eighth largest city in the country. The elimination of the Film Commission and the revenue and publicity it brings to the city is indicative of the chaos that is City Hall. Truly a dumb, short-sighted move.
• Jim Neri:
I would love to see the numbers that back up the $100 million claim since it is hard to believe we would let that public money go. My experiences watching film crews operate at Windansea Beach in La Jolla is that they arrive, take over the area, bring their own catered food, film their scene and go back to L.A. without spending a dime locally. San Diego is a convenient location for these shoots and we should charge for them. If we are, let’s see the numbers and where the money is going for the betterment of San Diego.
• Carol Marino (in response to Neri):
Who do you think benefited financially from these shoots? Local film crew (lighting, grip, hair, makeup, stunt, set, coordinators, etc.), local caterers, hotels that were utilized to put up the outside production team, local police, fire, parking, permit fees, local production rental companies, local hardware, grocery and other stores were the sources of supplies and much more. This all generated money to stimulate the local San Diego economy! We lived there, worked there, shopped there and went out to eat and see movies there. In other words, our income was spent there supporting all of the local businesses. My husband and I are very proud to have been a part of the San Diego production family during Cathy Anderson’s very successful building up and overseeing all of San Diego’s production for her many years of dedication and hard work as film commissioner. Other cities across the country that need money to stimulate their economy are fighting to get the film companies to come to their city because of the incredible amount of money generated by production. I have complete trust that Cathy’s facts and figures are accurate.
• Sanford Hampton:
I think it is an absolute ridiculous, ludicrous, buffoon-ish, asinine, idiotic, lame, weak, spineless and extremely stupid move to close down the Film Commission. … How could anybody allow it to happen? Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad!
It will create purposeful chaos and confusion for a very long time. If it is going to be like this, I hereby declare myself the new San Diego film commissioner! Thank you everybody!
• Mitzi Kapture:
I am truly disappointed and confused about the decision to close the San Diego Film Commission. Why would close a business that makes $100 on a $1 investment? I worked as an actress in two different television series that Stephen Cannell created and produced with Stu Segall Productions. Not only did the Film Commission make this possible but our shows helped employ so many people and businesses in San Diego. Cathy Anderson was especially instrumental in making everything in our production happen with grace and with the highest standards. Closing down this source of income for San Diego affects the city on so many levels.
On a personal level, moving to San Diego to film “Silk Stalkings” for five years was an easy move from L.A. and I loved the city (we never shut down production because of bad weather). It changed my life as a performer and on a financial level. It is L.A.’s sister city.
• Ethel Yamamoto:
Companies and organizations all attempt to quantify revenue and the easiest way is to tie direct benefits of revenue. It is also true that ancillary revenues are generated and should be acknowledged and credited. It appears to me that the San Diego Film Commission was neither acknowledged nor given credit for the various revenues generated by its activities. This is an example of one job multiplying revenue sources/employment in numerous “supporting” categories.
Comments and excerpts have been edited for clarity and style. See anything in there we should fact check? Tell us here.